Decades after the state killing of playwright, Kenule Saro-Wiwa and eight activists from his ethnic Ogoni stock under the aegis of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), in response to years of Shell oil spills which had devastated the environment, Amnesty International says it now has massive cache of internal documents and other evidence pointing to Shell’s complicity in horrific crimes committed by the Nigerian military in the 1990s.
In a statement on Tuesday, Amnesty wants investigations launched in the three relevant jurisdictions: namely Nigeria, where the crimes occurred, as well as the UK and the Netherlands, where Shell is headquartered, following what it called its role in a swathe of horrific crimes committed by the Nigerian military government in the oil-producing Ogoniland region during the period.
Responding to AI’s request for comments, Shell Nigeria and its parent company wrote: “The allegations cited in your letter against [Royal Dutch Shell] and [Shell Nigeria] are false and without merit. [Shell Nigeria] did not collude with the military authorities to suppress community unrest and in no way encouraged or advocated any acts of violence in Nigeria. In fact, the company believes that dialogue is the best way to resolve disputes. We have always denied these allegations, in the strongest possible terms.”
AI however insists that documents reviewed show that Shell knew that it was highly likely that Saro-Wiwa would be found guilty and executed, for declaring the oil giant persona non-grata in Ogoniland in January 1993, but went ahead to discuss ways to deal with the “Ogoni problem” with the government. The company was then forced to leave temporarily, citing security concerns.
The call for probe is coming 22 year after Saro-Wiwa’s death by hanging and his final words to the tribunal that convicted him, when he “warned that Shell would face its own day in court. We are determined to make this happen,” said Audrey Gaughran.
“Justice must be done – for Ken Saro-Wiwa and for the thousands of others whose lives were ruined by Shell’s destruction of Ogoniland,” he stressed.
The Nigerian military’s campaign to silence the Ogoni people’s protests against Shell’s pollution led to widespread and serious human rights violations, many of which also amounted to criminal offences.
“The evidence we have reviewed shows that Shell repeatedly encouraged the Nigerian military to deal with community protests, even when it knew the horrors this would lead to – unlawful killings, rape, torture, the burning of villages,” said Audrey Gaughran, Director of Global Issues at Amnesty International.
“In the midst of this brutal crackdown Shell even provided the military with material support, including transport, and in at least one instance paid a military commander notorious for human rights violations. That it has never answered for this is an outrage.
“It is indisputable that Shell played a key role in the devastating events in Ogoniland in the 1990s, but we now believe that there are grounds for a criminal investigation. Bringing the massive cache of evidence together was the first step in bringing Shell to justice. We will now be preparing a criminal file to submit to the relevant authorities, with a view to prosecution.”

Available evidence shows that Shell repeatedly encouraged the Nigerian military to deal with community protests, even when it knew the horrors this would lead to – unlawful killings, rape, torture, the burning of villages, Gaughran stressed.
The Nigerian government’s campaign against the Ogoni people culminated in the execution of the nine Ogoni men, including Ken Saro-Wiwa, the writer and activist who led the protests. The executions followed a blatantly unfair trial and sparked a global outcry.
In June 2017 the widows of four of the men filed a writ against Shell in the Netherlands, accusing the company of complicity in their deaths.
AI insists an individual or company can be held criminally responsible for a crime if they encourage, enable, exacerbate or facilitate it, even if they were not direct actors. For example, knowledge of the risks that corporate conduct could contribute to a crime, or a close connection to the perpetrators, could lead to criminal liability. Amnesty International’s new report “A Criminal Enterprise?” makes the case that Shell was involved in crimes committed in Ogoniland in this way.
In the 1990s Shell was the single most important company in Nigeria. During the Ogoni crisis, Shell and the Nigerian government operated as business partners, and had regular meetings to discuss the protection of their interests.
Internal memos and minutes from meetings show Shell lobbying senior government officials for military support, even after the security forces had carried out mass killings of protesters. They also show that on several occasions Shell provided logistical or financial assistance to military or police personnel when it was well aware that they had been involved in murderous attacks on defenceless villagers.
Shell has always denied that it was involved in the human rights violations, but there has never been an investigation into the allegations.
While Shell publicly sought to downplay the environmental damage it had caused, internal documents reveal that senior staff knew MOSOP had a legitimate grievance, and were highly concerned about the poor state of pipelines.
On 29 October 1990, Shell requested “security protection” from an elite paramilitary police unit called the Mobile Police at its facility in Umuechem village, where peaceful protests were taking place. Over the next two days, the Mobile Police attacked the village with guns and grenades, killing at least 80 people and torching 595 houses. Many of the bodies were dumped in a nearby river.
From at least this point on, Shell executives would have understood the risks associated with calling for intervention from the security forces, but continued its lobbying activities, AI noted.
“For example, in 1993, shortly after it had left Ogoniland, Shell repeatedly asked the Nigerian government to deploy the army to Ogoniland to protect a new pipeline which was being laid by contractors. This resulted in the shooting of 11 people at a village called Biara on 30 April, and the shooting to death of a man at Nonwa village on 4 May.
“Less than a week after the shooting at Nonwa, Shell executives had a series of meetings with senior government and security officials.
“The minutes of these meetings show that, rather than raising concerns about the shootings of unarmed protesters, Shell was actively lobbying for the government and the security forces to allow them to continue work in Ogoniland – and was offering “logistical” help in return.
“Shell also offered financial support. One internal company document reveals that on 3 March 1994, the company made a payment of more than $900 US dollars to the ISTF, a special unit created to “restore order” in Ogoniland. This was just ten days after the Unit commander ordered the shooting of unarmed protestors outside Shell’s regional headquarters in Port Harcourt. The document states that this payment was a “show of gratitude and motivation for a sustained favourable disposition towards [Shell] in future assignments.”
“Sometimes Shell played a more direct role in the bloodshed – for example by transporting armed forces to break up protests, even when it became clear what the consequences would be,” the report added.
Continuing, Gaughran said “on a number of occasions, Shell’s request to the government for help tackling what it termed the “Ogoni issue” was followed by a new wave of brutal human rights violations by the military in Ogoniland. It is difficult not to see causal links – or to suppose that Shell was not aware at the time how its requests were being interpreted.
“Sometimes Shell played a more direct role in the bloodshed – for example by transporting armed forces to break up protests, even when it became clear what the consequences would be. This clearly amounts to enabling or facilitating the horrific crimes that followed.”
On 13 December 1993, shortly after a coup had brought General Sani Abacha to power, Shell wrote to the new military administrator of Rivers State, naming specific communities where protests against the company had occurred and requesting assistance.
One month later, in January 1994, the government ordered the establishment of the ISTF. Later that year the violence against the Ogonis reached its horrifying peak when the ISTF carried out raids on Ogoni villages, killing, raping, torturing and detaining people.
According to an Amnesty International report released on 24 June 1994 some 30 villages had been attacked and “more than 50 members of the Ogoni ethnic group (were) reported to have been extra-judicially executed.” The ISTF Commander boasted of these raids on television, and they were widely reported on. In July that year, the Dutch ambassador told Shell that the army had killed some 800 Ogonis.